RB PBEM #1 - Discussion Thread - No Players!

[Garath]

At this point I'd also like to say that it looks like a great map to me as well, just to weigh in on the side of people who think that but haven't felt the need to come out of lurk mode to say it before.

Garath

[RefSteel]

I agree that the map is making for a very interesting game - it's also a lot more balanced than a randomly-generated one would be (just check out the one Sullla rolled up before his modifications!) and I'm not convinced that perfect balance is either achievable or desirable. If anyone doubts the differing value of identical starting tiles, consider: Spain On a Lake™ with a seafood resource or two vs. (say) Germany On a Lake with the same

Willingness to create the map in the first place and handle the inevitable complaints/nit-picks should not be undervalued either, to say nothing of learning from them as Sullla always does (e.g. nobody with crazy gold starts here, and the next map will include better awareness of the navigability rules for lakes). Everyone on this map has a reasonable chance to win, no one has an overwhelming one, and random factors within the game (Dreylin's amazing hut luck) and especially player skill at the game and diplomacy are playing a much, much larger role than the map in determining the strength of people's positions.

[Krill]

I don't think I've been overly harsh critiquing the map; I pointed the sole major problem with the map being m-hs' food distribution; if he'd had a sheep and fish from up in the ice and tundra moved down in the temperate region the map would have had no major problems. And that's good, compared to many maps that get played on.

I pointed it out so that hopefully people reading this thread can learn to appreciate the nuances of balancing map. I'm not posting in a desire to prove that all maps must be equal, with identical starts and surrounding lands. I can, if people want to discuss that, start another thread somewhere...

[Strow]

I see MH has blocked the west side of the map off. Good to see how one side is working out a plan or a backstab on where to settle cities while MH is just going for the land grab.

[Swiss Pauli]

I see MH has blocked the west side of the map off. Good to see how one side is working out a plan or a backstab on where to settle cities while MH is just going for the land grab.

As he's settled without knowledge of AH, mh has missed the horses by two tiles. It'll be interesting to see whether Dreylin moves for those horses: without the pigs there's no strong food special available, and to compete for the pigs as well will surely set him on a collison course with mh.

[sunrise089]

I find the early rush to wonders very surprising in this game.

MP guys play a game type called a CTON (Imhotep hosted a SG at Civfanatics with simmilar rules), an always war game lasting 120 turns on quick speed. In a CTON no private communication or teamwork is allowed. Good CTON players generally agree that it only makes sense to chase wonders in a few circumstances:

1) It is a powerful wonder (Oracle, Gardens) and you have the doubler resource.
2) It is a powerful wonder that is falling late and can be picked up quickly.
3) It is a weaker wonder (Chichen Itza, Great Wall) that is falling late and can be picked up quickly AND you have the resource doubler.
4) It is a weaker wonder that is falling late AND you are Industrious.

I suspect the difference between this game and a CTON is the turn length - delaying another city to build a wonder isn't as critical when the game isn't going to end (with a time victory) in 120 turns.

Anyone have a different theory?

[Imhotep]

@sunrise:

The difference is also that league CTONs tend to be much more aggressive. You always have to be aware of the fact that somebody may rush you early. In this game the guys have made good use of diplomacy, which gives you much more ease on military issues. Chasing a wonder becomes much more viable if you don't have to care about attacks for a given period.

[sunrise089]

@sunrise:

The difference is also that league CTONs tend to be much more aggressive. You always have to be aware of the fact that somebody may rush you early. In this game the guys have made good use of diplomacy, which gives you much more ease on military issues. Chasing a wonder becomes much more viable if you don't have to care about attacks for a given period.

Imhotep,

I thought about that but I'm not sure that tells the whole story. Do you think in a cton if you felt totally safe (like protective Mali versus neighbors without metal or horse) you would chase more wonders? I'd think instead I would just build more workers and settlers.

[Swiss Pauli]

I find the early rush to wonders very surprising in this game.

...[edit]...

I suspect the difference between this game and a CTON is the turn length - delaying another city to build a wonder isn't as critical when the game isn't going to end (with a time victory) in 120 turns.

Anyone have a different theory?

Nope, but another reason why you're right is that most wonders require heavy short-term investment for a long-term pay-off, and a game ending on T120 simply isn't likely to generate sufficient return on that investment.

[Imhotep]

Imhotep,

I thought about that but I'm not sure that tells the whole story. Do you think in a cton if you felt totally safe (like protective Mali versus neighbors without metal or horse) you would chase more wonders? I'd think instead I would just build more workers and settlers.

Well, you're right of course - the only worthwhile wonders for a CTON are the 'Henge and Oracle. I think it's a combination of both of our opinions...